Public Participation - As the Meeting followed a public meeting to discuss applications relating to Richards Garage there was no further public participation.

Planning Applications -

The two applications relating to Richards Garage were the sole topic for discussion.

Cllr. Irving expressed concern about the access strip to Prof. Hudson’s land and the Chair indicated that in the context of the applications submitted it was irrelevant and that the Council could only deal with the applications on the table.

The Council was unanimous in its objection to the proposals and this is set out in a letter dated 29th September addresses to Director of Development & Environment at North Somerset Council and which forms an integral part of the Minutes.

There being no other business the meeting was declared closed at 21.10 hours.

The Parish Council objects to the applications for the above site on the following grounds.

Rural business.

It is our reading of current policy (H.1, 8.28 2nd. deposit draft Replacement Local Plan) that the business should be actively and widely marketed for sale or at least be proven to be non-viable and as the land is currently designated for business use then this requirement needs to be implemented. Is the whole of the land designated for business use?

Legislation.

Bearing in mind its current use, i.e. petrol storage and supply, oil change and car repairs, it is surprising that no survey of potentially contaminated land has been undertaken. The Council is aware that the leat has been culverted and is concerned that this could be affected by the proposed development. A full "Environmental Impact Assessment" should be undertaken- it is surprising in view of current usage that the applicant considered this unnecessary as per their application.

Density & Privacy.

Considered far too dense for this site when considering that some of the proposed properties will be only 0.95 metres from existing properties and will seriously affect their right to light. Privacy will be seriously affected with overshadowing and potential intrusion. Whilst not specifically mentioned street lighting and security lights systems will be intrusive on existing properties.

Parking.

The application shows 22 parking spaces on site of which 6 are garages. Using the findings of the Wrington Parish Plan the site will be at least 6 spaces short and this can only lead to off-site parking in Broad Street, The Triangle or Ladywell. As an example Broad Street currently has space for 18 cars whereas the residents who rely on on-street parking total 25! Add to this the fact that this is the "shopping centre" for the village and houses a popular inn, with no parking facilities, then any potential additional parking will undoubtedly create congestion problems. It could also be detrimental to local business as if customers cannot park then they will find alternative outlets for shopping etc and could lead ultimately to a loss of facilities within the Village.

Note:- The NSC Housing supply bulletin, April 2004, reported an average of 3.3 vehicles per dwelling for equivalent developments, this suggests 45 cars!

Additionally the small garden space shown on the site maps will inevitably lead householders to convert the garages into storage units exacerbating the problem again.

Wrington has a fairly aged population and there are already issues with pedestrians on safety and the potential increase that will be created by this development with its shortage of on-site parking, will only increase the problem.

Access.

The site plan indicates the site access as being 3.65 metres whereas at its narrowest point it is only 3.18 metres and service vehicles (waste and fire etc.) would have great difficulty in entering the site. This would effectively mean that waste would have to be left on Broad Street for collection thereby cluttering up an already severely congested area.

Flooding

Clearly development of this site will reduce the ability of water to run off as there will be an increase in the rate of flow to the drainage system. In 1968 Broad Street was flooded!

Conservation Area.

The housing design and quality is not felt to be in keeping with this Conservation Area with the developers suggesting the use of UPVC. This is against NSC policy and as we have had a recent case where a householder has been made to replace a new UPVC window with a wood frame window to comply with standards then it is considered appropriate that any new build should comply.

The Arboricultural report by JP Associates gives a balanced view on the developable area of the site which the planning consultants appear to have ignored. It is the Council's opinion that the developer should pay more notice as this would reduce both density and impact.

Lighting.

There is no mention in the plans of a lighting scheme and if the development goes ahead then it will need to be sympathetic with the existing village scheme with white lights necessary. As the road will be private who will it fall upon to maintain as the Parish Council may not be prepared to include in its existing lighting stock.

Section 106 - if the scheme is approved.

The Parish Council would wish to see a contribution to improving facilities within the Parish e.g. upgrading of the existing lighting stock.